CV replies to Whaleoil

Written By: - Date published: 9:33 am, August 18th, 2012 - 143 comments
Categories: blogs, making shit up - Tags: ,

Whaleoil misunderstands Colonial Fleet Uniform Code of Justice

By Colonial Viper

On August 17, the impartial political journalist extraordinaire Whaleoil wildly accused me of venting “death threats” against the Pagani family The Standard and Death Threats | Whale Oil Beef Hooked | A blog by Cameron Slater . Let me reassure readers (and the Paganis) that not only is Whaleoil dreaming somewhere ‘way out there’, but that he also completely misunderstands the fiction part of ‘science fiction drama’ and the (Battlestar Galactica) Colonial Fleet Uniform Code of Justice.

In short, Zarak and Gaeta, being an elected politician and commissioned officer in the Colonial Fleet respectively, both charged with High Treason, would have had the privilege and due process of a full Colonial Fleet Courts Martial at the end of the final season episode “Blood on the Scales”. Unfortunately due to time constraints, the SyFy episode could not show such intricate (and ultimately boring) legal detail and skipped to the overly dramatic firing squad. Let me assure you that no actors were actually harmed in the filming of that scene.

The bottom line being, if the Paganis had performed a bloody coup to overthrow the legitimate Colonial Government in the SyFy universe, while co-opting local military forces (as Zarak and Gaeta had, at gun point) then they might be in a spot of bother today, in some faraway fictional universe. Anything else is up to Whale’s fevered, and vastly overstretched, imagination.

COLONIAL VIPER

Just in case anyone is in danger of taking Whale seriously, we’ll add these reviews of his blog from the “mainstream media”.

Sunday Star Times:

The local blogosphere is loud and volatile, the new frontline of political debate. But even in this fierce arena, Slater is infamous for dragging the discourse to new lows, with vicious, juvenile, sometimes misogynistic attacks.

Like American gossip juggernaut Perez Hilton, Slater routinely uses Photoshop to vilify his targets: grafting Helen Clark’s head onto the body of a crotchless starlet, or riddling her with digital bulletholes. On seeing an article titled “The World’s Ugliest Dogs”, Slater “couldn’t resist” reposting the story, appended with pictures of female Labour MPs. He has published bizarre sexual allegations against a female Labour official and challenged strangers to fights, including the sons of Folole Muliaga.

Denis Welch on RNZ:

“Whale Oil Beef Hooked is by an Auckland Right Winger called Cameron Slater and it really is an almost hysterical abusive right wing blog to the point where a lot of the comments are starting to cross the line now. Farrar gets a lot of those too… it is really getting out of control.”

The Press:

“you get the feeling that if the blogosphere was an ecosystem, the far-Right bloggers would be bottom feeders.”

143 comments on “CV replies to Whaleoil ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Mighty Kites 1
    18 August 2012 at 9:37 am

    There is no question that Whale Oil is generally pretty repulsive. However, what I have seen emanating from The Standard of late is nearly as bad, and pretty disgusting actually

    • Bill 1.1
      18 August 2012 at 9:48 am

      Care to provide links to those ‘repulsive’ and/or ‘pretty digusting’ posts? Hm? Or even just re-type the ‘headers’ of these ‘repulsive’ and ‘pretty disgusting’ posts?

      • ropata 1.1.1
        18 August 2012 at 12:49 pm

        The comment that has whaleoil’s knickers in a twist:
        http://thestandard.org.nz/two-little-paggis-squeal-and-squeak/comment-page-1/#comment-509239

        The way I read the comment was that it’s time for the left to clean house and stop sabotaging itself. Ahh well this is the reality of life in opposition…

      • OneTrack 1.1.2
        18 August 2012 at 1:51 pm

        What about commenters abusing army personnel and families of serving personnel currently serving in Afghanistan who had the “temerity” to make some comments on The Standard a few days ago. They made the mistake of saying they were happy for JK to go to the US. That was it. Numerous TS commenters (one in particular was leading the charge) just ripped into them. Abuse flying backwards and forwards including threats of physical violence. No moderators to be seen. It was (almost) unbelievable. What is repulsive about whale except that he asks questions that some people dont like answering and exposing issues that some people dont want exposed and being a right winger?

        • Colonial Viper 1.1.2.1
          18 August 2012 at 2:10 pm

          Link please. Because I prefer not to rely on your Right Addled Memory.

          • OneTrack 1.1.2.1.1
            18 August 2012 at 2:14 pm

            Link for what -the punch up on the standard or whale expressing opinions that some people dont want expressed?

        • weka 1.1.2.2
          18 August 2012 at 2:13 pm

          I agree, put a up a link please.

            • ropata 1.1.2.2.1.1
              18 August 2012 at 5:24 pm

              don’t forget these threats by some keyboard warrior called ‘DJ’

              • BM …
                18 August 2012 at 5:33 pm

                Well, that bad12 wanker certainly deserved it.
                Some of the comments he made, I some how doubt he would say in person.

                • Pascal's bookie …
                  18 August 2012 at 5:57 pm

                  Make comments in person to an anonymous trade me forum commenter?

                  How does that work?

                  • BM …
                    18 August 2012 at 6:24 pm

                    If he was standing in front of a NZ solider, I seriously doubt he would repeat what he wrote on here.

                    • McFlock …
                      18 August 2012 at 6:28 pm

                      Indeed. But then there would be more to go on than some internet warrior’s claim to be XYZ. Uniforms, etc.

              • DJ …
                19 August 2012 at 12:03 pm

                Just shows you how one sided and loopy you lot are! At no stage did I make reference to or directly imply “firing squad” death threats.

                All I challenge you wankers on here to do, is be at the airport or naval base when these heroes of ours come home and make the same comments you make on here to their faces.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  19 August 2012 at 12:09 pm

                  Nothing to do with them. The are military service personnel following orders under very difficult conditions. It’s Keys face that things need to be said to.

                  BTW how do you honour NZDF personnel by keeping them in a deadly fight where there is no known, achievable military goal.

                • Murray Olsen …
                  19 August 2012 at 5:22 pm

                  I’ve discussed my views on Afghanistan and Iraq with a number of army people, including an SAS soldier. At the airport when they return would not be the appropriate place to do it. I wouldn’t bother discussing my views with you, DJ, because you’re just a keyboard warrior.

            • gobsmacked 1.1.2.2.1.2
              18 August 2012 at 5:36 pm

              Since you’ve linked to that thread, BM, I will repeat the question that you avoided answering:

              This was my comment …

              Instead of more playground abuse, let’s address the core issue.

              Do you think NZ troops should leave Afghanistan? If so, why? If not, why not?

              (My answer is “Yes – because they are dying for nothing.” Yours?)

              • BM …
                18 August 2012 at 5:51 pm

                Going by what I read here, I think their presence in Afghanistan is well worth it and I think they’re doing a great job.

                http://www.nzdf.mil.nz/operations/overseas-deployments/afghanistan/nz-prt/default.htm

                http://www.nzdf.mil.nz/operations/overseas-deployments/afghanistan/nz-prt/projects.htm

                I certainly don’t think the soldiers and their families deserve the abuse and insults thrown at them by certain sectors of the left.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  18 August 2012 at 5:55 pm

                  Afghanistan is a worthless graveyard for our boys

                  The number of attacks on Western troops by Afghan “allies” is markedly up.

                  A Taliban commander now says that Afghan police and army have been thoroughly infiltrated by men loyal to the Taliban; they kill the Westerners who train them and take western supplied weapons back to the Taliban.

                  Afghanistan is a dead end and there is no exit.

                  http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/taliban-chief-says-his-fighters-have-infiltrated-afghan-forces-and-are-killing-foreign-troops/2012/08/16/89e3cbbc-e7df-11e1-9739-eef99c5fb285_print.html

                  • Steve Wrathall …
                    19 August 2012 at 2:25 pm

                    So a “Taliban commander” is now CV’s font of truth?

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      19 August 2012 at 2:49 pm

                      The Washington Post is, mate. Are you aware that at least 39 “Green on Blue” Western allied fatalities have occured in Afghanistan, in this way, since the start of the year.

                    • gobsmacked …
                      19 August 2012 at 3:24 pm

                      Steve, like many others in this discussion – or the previous discussion linked to – you seem unwilling to address the central question –

                      Why are NZ troops remaining in Afghanistan?

                      Let’s make things easy for you. Let’s take it as read that a) you support NZ’s soldiers b) you don’t like Colonial Viper. OK?

                      Now … why are NZ troops remaining in Afghanistan?

                    • gobsmacked …
                      19 August 2012 at 6:31 pm

                      So a “Taliban commander” is now CV’s font of truth?

                      Oh look, there’s TV One telling the same story, using an American television report. In fact, it’s been reported across the world’s media.

                      If you think they’re wrong Steve, please say so.

                    • Pascal's bookie …
                      19 August 2012 at 6:39 pm

                      Yeah, what the fuck would Mullah Omar know about the Taliban?

                      Everyone knows he’s a one-eyed-bastard.

                • gobsmacked …
                  18 August 2012 at 5:57 pm

                  @BM

                  So you oppose their withdrawal next year?

                  If they are withdrawn (as planned), and what they have done is undone, what did the soldiers’ deaths achieve?

                  • BM …
                    18 August 2012 at 6:01 pm

                    Occupational risk of being a solider, one most soldiers don’t have problem with.
                    And no I’m not opposed to the soldiers leaving, their time is up and they achieved some good stuff.

                    • gobsmacked …
                      18 August 2012 at 6:12 pm

                      So why are they staying there now?

                      What is the military purpose (as opposed to PR/politics)?

                      one most soldiers don’t have problem with.

                      You’ve asked the dead ones?

                    • BM …
                      18 August 2012 at 6:22 pm

                      So why are they staying there now?

                      Because the deployment finishes September 2014

                      You obviously have a few issues with these soldiers being in Afghanistan.

                    • gobsmacked …
                      18 August 2012 at 6:29 pm

                      Because the deployment finishes September 2014

                      That doesn’t make any sense. Why not October 2014? Or 2013?

                      Repeat: What is the military reason? Have the Taliban said “It’s in our diary, we agree to lose in September 2014”?

                      Yes, of course I have issues with people being killed for no reason.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      18 August 2012 at 9:46 pm

                      There aren’t any achievable military goals in Afghanistan. Not one. All you can do is try and hold the ground as long as you can, taking losses all the while.

                    • Balanced View …
                      19 August 2012 at 6:37 pm

                      Must there be a military purpose?

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      19 August 2012 at 6:43 pm

                      lol if there is no soldiering to be done, don’t send soldiers

  2. captain hook 2
    18 August 2012 at 9:40 am

    name it.
    anyway the point is that the national party cannot stand being criticised and when its low dealings are exposed then it resorts to name calling.
    It thinks that telling the truth is disgusting.

  3. Tiger Mountain 3
    18 August 2012 at 9:49 am

    Whale has come a public “gutser” a few times too many now. One trick pony territory.

    Particularly on union matters, carrying the ball for the nasty types at the POAL, and totally losing the plot on the Meatworkers shed/national office structure division of finances, where he initially tried to make a case for financial impropriety by the union.

    The most disturbing element of his www. efforts though for me are the encouragement of some sort of junior Stasi curtain twitching nark brigade (report vehicle IDs etc.) as was actively encouraged by the bloated tory turd during the altering of National party billboards episode.

    Whale is the kind of guy that will be forever “hoist on his own….” you know the rest.

    • Murray Olsen 3.1
      19 August 2012 at 12:36 am

      I’d wager that at least 50% of the threads in Whalespew would contain death threats or talk about shooting leftists. He’s a deeply misogynist and conflicted individual, who posts about gay rights then uses cocksmoker as an insult. In one thread where Cactus Kate had spied on sex tourists, he even went so far as to say that a rich bloke can get any woman he likes. There are continual attacks on left women because of their appearance and I dare say Facebook would ban it as a hate site. In Nactional circles, though, it’s seen as a font of wisdom and a platform for serious discussion.

      • Tim G. 3.1.1
        23 August 2012 at 4:56 am

        +1 – what an enormously conflicted, contradicted, disgraced and discredited person he is.

        Many TS readers (and authors) lower themselves by resorting to the same kind of vituperation.

  4. Sanctuary 4
    18 August 2012 at 9:54 am

    Meanwhile, John Pagani, the man who finds David Farrar so “reasonable” is enjoying whispering sweet online nothings with Fran O’Sullivan and the rest of the right wing cheer squad.

    http://www.facebook.com/fran.osullivan.50/posts/450224908351702?notif_t=share_reply

    Judged by the company you keep maybe JP & JP (as Fran – I assume it is “Fran” for you John, although you appear so close that “Franny” can’t be ruled out- so sweetly calls you and wifey)?

    “… They bleat it might cost them their jobs if they were exposed – tough. Time for new rules of the game…”

    Who is the bully here again? A leading mainstream media journalist threatening to use her power to expose internet commentators with the intention of getting them fired from their jobs because she doesn’t like what they are saying, perhaps?

    The TINA neo-liberals like O’Sullivan are clearly getting worried that the attacks on the political courtiers who surround Labour’s right wing leadership clique are gaining traction. They are running scared a major political could start offering an alternative program to their Randian agenda.

    Looks like the online activism might be getting somewhere!

    • QoT 4.1
      18 August 2012 at 10:51 am

      Oooh, and she repeats the “KKK” line. How very brave of O’Sullivan to post her real feelings under her real name, oh wait except that’s what she gets paid for.

      • QoT 4.1.1
        18 August 2012 at 10:55 am

        It’s also especially adorable how a lot of the support she’s getting is from a pseudonymous Facebook profile of a blog where 60% of the named contributors are posting under pseudonyms.

        • kiwi_prometheus 4.1.1.1
          18 August 2012 at 12:58 pm

          Yeah and you are real adorable, Queen of Manhaters.

          Still performing vain, lonely soliloquies over on your blog?

          Too bad you aren’t Shearer’s speech writer eh?

          I’m sure a theme of “liberating wymmin from the fucking sexist pigs patriarchy!” would really engage heaps of the 800 0000 switched off voters, the Left needs.

          • IrishBill 4.1.1.1.1
            18 August 2012 at 1:01 pm

            You should rethink the way you phrased that.

          • Draco T Bastard 4.1.1.1.2
            18 August 2012 at 1:32 pm

            It seems that kiwi_prometheus’s manhood feels threatened by strong, independent women…

            hahahahahahaha

            • QoT 4.1.1.1.2.1
              18 August 2012 at 1:35 pm

              I especially like how he attacks my “soliloquies” and then demonstrates he hasn’t read any of them, since … yeah, I’ve totally been arguing that Labour should become more like a radfem commune. #what

        • Jackal 4.1.1.2
          18 August 2012 at 1:43 pm

          That’s it! I’ve decided to out myself because I’m so sick and tired of these hurtful accusation that my anonymity makes me like the KKK. I can’t stand it… The accusations have so much validity that they cut me to the bone and I’m willing to risk it all because I know our privacy laws are so well respected by the rightwing that everything will be OK!

          I’m willing to risk my financial history being published online, my sexual history being speculated upon and the rightwing evangelists undertaking vindictive attacks on my personal and professional life. It must be a huge weight of people like Cameron Slater, David Farrar and Cathy Odgers’ shoulders to know they will not have to run the risk of outing the wrong person. /sarc

          • mickysavage 4.1.1.2.1
            18 August 2012 at 4:57 pm

            You had me going there Jackal!

            I outed myself a while ago but I am in the fortunate position where my employment cannot be harmed and I believe I have nothing in my past that I care about getting publicised.

            Most are not in that position.  Having seen what Cameron does I recommend you hold onto your anonymity as a protective measure. 

          • McFlock 4.1.1.2.2
            18 August 2012 at 5:43 pm

            And lest we forget the obsessive nature of tories. Shitty comment, yes – but writing complaints to his employers?  
                     
            I like my boss. I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t be fired, but I see no reason to  expose a nice person to such a personality.

            • Murray Olsen 4.1.1.2.2.1
              19 August 2012 at 12:43 am

              I use my name because cancer is unfortunately more of a worry to me than anything those vile scum could do. However, I understand completely why others choose to use pseudonyms, given the lengths that those blogging pond scum are prepared to go to.

    • IrishBill 4.2
      18 August 2012 at 10:57 am

      Personally I think that people have been too rough and too personal on the Pagani’s here (if I had more time to spend on the blog I’d be driving harder moderation but I don’t).

      However, I also think the fact that Fran calls for writers here to lose their jobs because they write their thoughts on a blog is disgraceful and I can only hope she doesn’t have access to the personal information people provide in order to comment on her herald columns as she shows a frightening disregard for freedom of dissent.

      I don’t blog under a pseudonym because I fear for my sources of income or for my personal safety (although I would if I took the various threats that have been made against me seriously) but because I have a life that consists of a hell of a lot more than writing a post here every few weeks and I have no interest in becoming world famous in the NZ blogosphere or of becoming part of the beltway crowd.

      If I was making some kind of personal gain then I’d feel obliged to write under my own name but I don’t. If I’m ever in a position where there is such a conflict I’ll have to think long and hard about whether I out myself or just stop writing. I’d also probably write under my IRL name if I was interested in having my amateur analysis picked up by the MSM (who, quite rightly, don’t generally report sources that have no verifiable provenance) but again, I don’t because I’m happy with the level of engagement I’ve currently got.

      If anything writing here occasionally comes at the cost of doing other stuff I’d sometimes prefer to do particularly in terms of the obligation to engage in the comments that comes with authoring a post (although I can’t deny that’s it’s a privilege to have somewhere I can put my thoughts on politics up and discuss them with people I’d probably never meet in the real world).

      Sorry to be so self-indulgent but it’s something I’ve been thinking about for a while.

      • weka 4.2.1
        18 August 2012 at 11:15 am

        Good thoughts ta.

      • newsense 4.2.2
        18 August 2012 at 12:14 pm

        The Paganis are the embodiment, because they have chosen to be, of what is making a lot of people very angry. As such they are absolutely fair game.

        What is making people angry is a ham-fisted attempt for whatever reason at some kind of game politics- we’ll take the centre and then we’ll take the government.

        But as has been pointed out- the National party doesn’t go around saying they should increase taxes or bad mouth employers who are behaving badly or promise to significantly increase the minimum wage or improve collective bargaining. They airly pontificate about the underclass and do nothing. Not that the underclass is the result of anybody’s action.

        I almost want to say to Jenny Michie and others who have posted here- start a group called Labour Members, and regularly release press releases like the one on drug testing and systematic unemployment. Skip an ineffective caucus and go direct. There has been no one calling bullshit, no one standing up for New Zealand the way we dreamed it could be.

        It is typical that having gutted NZ news on 7 and on One to a degree, the Herald through O’Sullivan now wishes to have a left wing perspective reduced through sheer class power- write what you think and lose your job as it will be associated with where you work. (If this is a correct paraphrase) Along with countless protests where the police have just arrested people and had the charges later proved baseless this is more suppression.

        We expect more from Labour.

        We don’t expect the political spectrum to be drawn as:
        beneficiary lovers: beneficiary bashers or education lovers:teacher union lovers. That is lazy and bullshit.

        The Paganis are not the whole story, but they are the public face of the story. They have endorsed the strategy publicly, they are the ones who are Labour to the public, but have been joining National’s casual blame the bottom of society narrative and taking us with them.

        There are many other ways to reach the centre and be more impressive than Paula Bennett, Gerry Brownlee et al. See for example Julie Anne Genter.

        We expect Labour to be moral, to be inclusive, to be prudent and to be bloody intellectually rigorous.

        If Labour had a front bench filled with people as impressive as Ms Genter then they would be ready for government. This is what their members demand of them.

        History really doesn’t want to remember who lead the charge of the light brigade- it does remember effective Ministers of a cohesive, inspirational government. If you want to be in government as a more compassionate Paula Bennett, well, oh dear.

        If you can’t do a BBQ- then perhaps the equivalent?

        Also- leader gotta lead, not be lead. Key does, even though he’s quite hands off . If it’s going to be Shearer he needs to establish ground rules, get some good whips and get some discipline. And then show something of himself. We’ve waited. It’s been too long. Stop saying other people’s words, unless of course these are the ones you truly believe, in which case, yikes.

        • Colonial Viper 4.2.2.1
          18 August 2012 at 12:40 pm

          I almost want to say to Jenny Michie and others who have posted here- start a group called Labour Members, and regularly release press releases like the one on drug testing and systematic unemployment. Skip an ineffective caucus and go direct. There has been no one calling bullshit, no one standing up for New Zealand the way we dreamed it could be.

          Concept’s certainly worth kicking around and developing a bit. Responses could be based on actual, released, Labour Party policy/position papers.

          • newsense 4.2.2.1.1
            19 August 2012 at 10:36 pm

            I guess this thread has been left behind in the 24 hour blog cycle.

            But from all the waffle above:

            When people who know I voted Labour ask me what Labour would be doing differently I can’t tell them that there would be no job losses and that unemployment would be great. There’s a recession. Labour would probably have been trying to be Keynesian, but tough choices would still have to be made.

            I did tell them Labour wouldn’t be scapegoating unemployed and sick people with the unrelenting sickening intellectual dishonesty that Paula Bennett has.

      • QoT 4.2.3
        18 August 2012 at 12:19 pm

        who, quite rightly, don’t generally report sources that have no verifiable provenance

        I agree with you on this when it comes to reporting facts – did something happen or not happen – but O’Sullivan then specifically targets Bryce Edwards for having the audacity to link to pseudonymous blogs in his political round-ups (disclaimer: I’ve been linked to by Edwards on several occasions and enjoy the bump in pageviews that results).

        So apparently to O’Sullivan even the fact that we express opinions, and someone might say “hmm, this well-read blog which represents a broad chunk of the leftwing end of the spectrum has published some articles on this topic which might give some insight into how political actions are being received and interpreted” is a bad thing.

        And when that’s coming from someone who happily works for a publication which “gives out the password” to the actually anonymous editorial column every day it’s fucking bizarre (but I see that Keeping Stock, in another testing of the irony meter, tries to “out” the multiple people it alleges are actually Eddie, so as to discredit the idea that a pseudonym can itself be a reliable identifier of a person’s contributions to a debate.)

        • IrishBill 4.2.3.1
          18 August 2012 at 12:36 pm

          Yeah, I think you’re right. Certainly with regard to Bryce’s work (which I think is bloody valuable) however things I’ve written here have been quoted in a “hard” news story at least once in the past and I’m not altogether comfortable with that from a journalism perspective. Ironically the most recent quote was in Fran’s paper.

          As an aside, Fran’s been a bit upset with us since this debacle in 2008: http://thestandard.org.nz/fran-oshillivan-strikes-again/comment-page-1/#comment-35102

          In retrospect my post back then was a bit rough on her but hey, we were all learning about this new social media stuff and its boundaries back then.

          • QoT 4.2.3.1.1
            18 August 2012 at 1:36 pm

            A comment of mine at Hoyden About Town once got quoted in Marie Claire magazine. I was so proud.

          • Draco T Bastard 4.2.3.1.2
            18 August 2012 at 2:27 pm

            This new social media has boundaries? 😯

            • fnjckg 4.2.3.1.2.1
              18 August 2012 at 3:59 pm

              once i reflected on some of the things i had uttered online, i gotta big rush of the “black sabbath, eponymous first track starts with P, but you live and learn. I still like the ball of string and watchers analogy as helpful to people like moi with lots of thoughts and a Big Mouth. (or smoke b4 typing)

    • vto 4.3
      18 August 2012 at 11:22 am

      Is Fran O’Sullivan still boringly banging on about anonymous commentators?

      Is she thick?

      Does she not understand the reasons and principles around confidential voting in our elections? Nor the legitimate transfer of those reasons and principles to political commentary?

      sheesh

      • Bill 4.3.1
        18 August 2012 at 1:24 pm

        But don’t you know it’s the person making the point or argument that matters and that any merits the point or argument might contain mean nought? What planet you on vto?

      • Murray Olsen 4.3.2
        19 August 2012 at 1:08 am

        My answers to vto’s questions: Yes. Yes. No. No.

        • vto 4.3.2.1
          19 August 2012 at 9:05 am

          Perhaps Fran O’Sullivan would like explain why she would like to know who, for example, i am and the difference that makes?

          If she is around and brave enough to reply …… which I suspect she is not.

  6. Raymond A francis 6
    18 August 2012 at 9:59 am

    Ok I will play, so CV what did you mean when you said:
    “Time to put Zarak and Gaeta back in their place”

    • Colonial Viper 6.1
      18 August 2012 at 10:06 am

      That our trusty old Battlestar creaking and groaning as it does i.e. the Labour Party, needs to be retaken by those who have served her for so long, and who really care about her.

      • mickysavage 6.1.1
        18 August 2012 at 5:07 pm

        You mean Slater is trying to blacken your name and divert attention away from the mess that Paula Bennett has created by making an outlandishly wrong interpretation of a symbolic statement that you made?

  7. locus 7
    18 August 2012 at 10:17 am

    I’ve just read some misinformed and abusive comments from Fran O’Sullivan about CV and The Standard on her FB site, and I’d thought you’d like to know that she has garnered a strong following of 14 subscribers and 8 ‘likes’.

    • muzza 7.1
      18 August 2012 at 10:34 am

      The below is an extract from FOS FB. I should not give it any air, but the use of the terminology is disgraceful!

      Clearly there are some who are shitting it!

      “Rather enjoying watching the Paganis dealing with the KKK (aka The Standard) and Cam Slater ripping these anonymous jerks up – particularly the aptly named Colonel Viper. I don’t read CV’s attacks as death threats tho. But it would be amusi
      ng if the VRWC (aka said Cam Slater, Cathy Odgers and David Farrar before he coined his business) outed Irish Bill, Zetetic, Colonel Viper and the rest of the bravely anonymous writers once and for all. They bleat it might cost them their jobs if they were exposed – tough. Time for new rules of the game. All the wonderfully and historically liberal JP and JP have done is stick up for David Shearers’s stance. Hardly a hanging offence. But KKK can’t take it.
      No balls! (I would have used the term cojone but after being outed in NBR last week have decided to be more direct).”

  8. Raymond A francis 8
    18 August 2012 at 10:18 am

    Ok, that makes sense
    Got to say that is not how I originally took it, traitors and so forth but that makes a lot more sense

    Now let’s do it!

    • Colonial Viper 8.1
      18 August 2012 at 10:21 am

      +1 mate.

    • locus 8.2
      18 August 2012 at 10:35 am

      I fervently hope that Shearer will flick off the nasty advisers who think that the ends justify the means.

      To achieve great things the Leader has to respect and serve those who are the heart of the Labour Party.

      • muzza 8.2.1
        18 August 2012 at 11:02 am

        Locus, afraid to tell you that Shearer will not be changing his “strategic advisors”, for anything less than more of the same..

        Questions for some..

        1: Why was Shearer elected as leader
        2: Why was Robsertson elected deputy
        3: Why are the current strategists being used

        Simple questions with simple answers, to which some simply can’t wrap their heads around!

        Labour is finished, and its been a deliberate act. Those who hang onto it hoping the direction will change are deluded!

        Only when people accept that the system we have is sick and rotten to the core, and that in order to effect change, they will have to get off their arse, can any hope be refered to or investigated!

        • mickysavage 8.2.1.1
          18 August 2012 at 5:10 pm

          You could add to that, why did Pagani attack Cunliffe during the leadership campaign.  For someone on the party payroll to do this, in the way I see it, is appalling.  Anyone, staffer or contractor, who publicly attacks a candidate for the leadership should have their role no more.

  9. ropata 9
    18 August 2012 at 10:24 am

    CV criticised the paganis with rhetoric online.
    Slater is a convicted felon who actually attacks people in real life.

    whale knows his blog is a repulsive fever swamp and likes to roll in the stench.
    he’s like a psychopathic hobbit sitting in his basement all day ranting on the internet.

    his commenters are 95% awful (and insubstantial), no wonder most of them were burned when they came here.
    anyone suggesting people pay tax is immediately labelled a ‘communist’.

  10. Jimmie 10
    18 August 2012 at 12:34 pm

    WO & folks from here criticizing each other for abuse hurled is laughable. Pot + Kettle = Black??

    I would say as someone with no affiliation to Labour that if you folks really want to make a difference for your party is do the following:

    1 Personal Abuse: Keep it out. Criticize Shearer & his supporters for their actions and policies all you wish but mocking their names appears a little similar to childish school yard bully tactics.

    2 Argue policy & actions: Easy enough to pick out stuff from Shearer and his inept front bench.
    Faux pas’ like the sickness bene painting the roof should be hammered by the Labour left – with fairness this has been on here but there are plenty of other examples.

    3 Demand results: Shearer wanted the top job. He gets paid a good whack – probably 5-6 times more than the average Labour activist but has done nothing to show from it.He doesn’t have John Key on the ropes, his poll results are mediocre at best and his front bench are complacent and ineffective.
    He articulates no vision, tolerates dissection and disputes amongst his team, and hasn’t inspired the Labour party to do a lot.

    4 Contrast with Cunliffe: At every opportunity (meetings/conferences within Labour) push for support for Cunliffe. I am not a fan of his, I am definitely not of the left, but what I read of his 3 speeches I have some respect for his ability to articulate a vision for the party (even though not leader) and would be a lot more effective leader than the current one.

    There a lot more things that could be said but I would have though that a change in leadership should take place before the party conference as the changes proposed will make it harder to depose Shearer afterwards.

    • gobsmacked 10.1
      18 August 2012 at 2:09 pm

      I basically agree with that, Jimmie (albeit from a more left standpoint).

      The reason people go for the general attack is that they can’t rebut the specifics. So, for example, Bill’s very moving post on here about life on a benefit – and the huge outpouring of support he got – is a very good example of what the Standard can be. Shearer and his cheerleaders have no answer, which is why they’ve avoided any comment or engagement at all. Instead, they try to find the worst abuse – and there’s always some.

      Irony alert (hello Fran!) – this is exactly what the MSM do every day. Find the worst of insults on Twitter and Facebook and the internet, beat them up into a story (“Kiwis make death threats to Wayne Barnes / Paul Henry / Belorus / celeb of the moment”) and … pretend it’s journalism.

      It really isn’t. Good journalism would be to address the issues raised in the non-abusive, substantial discussions, which are by far the majority. But good journalism would be too hard.

    • lprent 10.2
      18 August 2012 at 4:34 pm

      If I read your comment correctly it seems to not include pointing out the incompetent ideological stupidity that is the trademark of the current government, holding some (actually many) silly journos to account for some of the crap that they write, looking at the favour pandering industry in NZ like PR companies and political “consultants”, the companies trying to weasel laws in that are good for them, and generally looking at fools everywhere.

      Who are you trying to fool by the way…. Idiot.

      • Jimmie 10.2.1
        18 August 2012 at 7:46 pm

        Duh – your attitude is half the problem Mr Prent.

        1 Again unnecessary personal abuse – did I call you an idiot or a nut job? No so why do you resort to such stupidity?

        2 Labour will never be successful with attacking National until their own house is in order.
        If you wish to continue with the strategy of foaming at the mouth over everything the Nats are doing rather than sorting Labour’s own crap out well tough – enjoy a Nat PM for the next 10 years.

        Think about it – when the All Blacks play tonight are they focused on the Aussie game plan or are they focused on their own game plan. Labour doesn’t have a game plan and all they can do is throw political beer bottles at the Nats from the sidelines.

        That is why I actually support the idea of Cunliffe becoming leader as he appears to be able come up with a game plan that moves Labour on from the failure of the Goff reign and those who hark back to Clark’s leadership.

        Another plus is that if Cunliffe becomes leader this would result in enmasse retirements from the old has beens and the chance for new blood to come into the Labour caucus.

        Again I say don’t worry so much about the Nats – get the left game/policy plan into action and remember its not the Nats you are in contest with its the voters. Why wait until 6 weeks before an election? Get stuck in and get policy out there now that is relevant and will speak to the average voter. I mean surely Laobur has relevant policies don’t they?

        • lprent 10.2.1.1
          18 August 2012 at 8:33 pm

          1. I like plain speaking and clear opinions. In particular being able to goad people to see what they really feel by expressing very clear opinions tearing holes in their theories and what they said. I really don’t have the time or interest in the delays of politeness in politics, friendships, family, or work.

          2. I agree that Labour has to get its house in order. But
          A. Labour isn’t the whole of the left and
          B. nor should they stop performing their job of opposition in testing the government while they’re getting their damn act together.

          After all that is what they are paid to do. With this pack of self-obsessed short term idiots in government, that scrutiny is required more than ever, because they really know how to screw up through ideological stupidity. Generally the problems in Labour over the last four years are expressed because they’re unable to sustain their effective attacks because some idiot in the Labour caucus screws up and provides National with a valuable distraction. It has been quite noticeable over the last 4 years that the greens are not doing that. That points to the current Labour caucus being less interested in being effective than they are in screwing up.

          And if you think that any sporting team doesn’t spend a hell of a lot of time looking at how their opposition plays in developing their own strategies and tactics then you are a bit simple. We were doing that in school sport decades ago.

        • Jackal 10.2.1.2
          18 August 2012 at 9:46 pm

          Jimmie

          Labour will never be successful with attacking National until their own house is in order.

          Labour needs to sort itself out before it can criticize the government? Labour does need to pick up its game a bit to be a more effective opposition party. However this does not mean National should have free rein to do whatever they want without criticism. This is especially so when National is stuffing up all over the place and their incompetence is detrimental to the longterm financial viability of the country. It will likely be a Labour led government that has to fix National’s mistakes after all. By becoming a more cohesive and therefore efficient opposition party, they will in fact be reducing their future workload.

          If you wish to continue with the strategy of foaming at the mouth over everything the Nats are doing rather than sorting Labour’s own crap out well tough – enjoy a Nat PM for the next 10 years.

          Foaming at the mouth? Do I detect a sewer troll in our midst? The best way to ensure a reduction of negative commentary about National is if John Key holds his ministers to that higher level of accountability he was talking about. Being a Prime Minister is all about putting your country first and keeping wayward ministers in line when their egos and inflated sense of entitlement threatens the parties political future.

          Despite what the rightwing might thunk, the leftwing is made up by very reasonable people. Do the right thing and cop less flack… Ipso facto.

          I say don’t worry so much about the Nats – get the left game/policy plan into action and remember its not the Nats you are in contest with its the voters.

          Labour is in competition with voters? Not really… Labour does need to work harder to ensure cooperation with the public, especially on significant issues. Unless Labour (or any political party for that matter) has constructive dialog with the public to garner support, holding National to account in parliament isn’t going to count for much. No amount of political advisors can make up for constructive dialog with the public. Even criticism should be listened to, because without that testing of ideas, beneficial policy that truly represents what the majority of New Zealander’s believe cannot be developed.

          It’s a pity that Nact effectively operate in a vacuum of ideologically driven blindness. Their failure to conduct themselves democratically doesn’t seem to stop them blaming Labour for the current dysfunctional situation… Nearly four years after they gained power I might add.

          I was reading through Kiwibogs general thread today, and it was hard going. I hate to admit it but Pete George actually seems reasonable in comparison to some of those commenting there. Despite the criticism the Standard has recently received, I wouldn’t like to see any changes to the moderation policy. Especially if that means similar rightwing sentiments and possible shill’s have free license to spout any old rubbish!

  11. OneTrack 11
    18 August 2012 at 1:37 pm

    Sunday Star Tmes, RNZ, The Press – all completely impartial news organisations? Yeah right – pull the other one.

  12. The Woodpecker 12
    18 August 2012 at 1:39 pm

    ‘whale oil beef hooked’ is a punch line from a very old, stupid and unfunny joke. Kind of suits then.

  13. Treetop 13
    18 August 2012 at 2:35 pm

    I’m secure in knowing that The Standard will out last Whaleoil and the Key Government.

    • lprent 13.1
      18 August 2012 at 4:38 pm

      Yep. We hit 5 years a few days ago. I am trying to finish a post on it (and one on heavy traffic from overseas) but Lyn keeps me working on the house move…. Which is more important ?

  14. fnjckg 14
    18 August 2012 at 3:54 pm

    ooohh, im still here.

  15. pukeko 15
    18 August 2012 at 4:11 pm

    Kāore colonial viper i whakaata te momo mau ake i te mana Māori tūturu, inarā, ko ia nei te tangata mārie, whakamōwai, hei aha māna te pākiwaha.

  16. gobsmacked 16
    18 August 2012 at 4:12 pm

    The new rules:

    Anonymous personal abuse is totally out of order.

    Unless you are senior Labour MPs talking to Duncan Garner. Then you can do what you want.

  17. mike 17
    18 August 2012 at 4:20 pm

    Just read the Whale post and comments. Wow what a puddle of vomit. And they accusse this place of being an echo-chamber? Every comment in agreement (bar one that had some doubts). I love all the numerous “There’s only one way to interpret CV’s comments” and “Somebody call the police!” Big OP even slips in a “Think of the children” kind of line.

    I thought the trolls here were stoopid, but I guess this shows we should be thankful we get the calibre of troll that we do (sorry that doesn’t apply to you King Kong).

    CV I can understand your desire to offer a defence against these moronic ‘death threat’ allegations, but otherwise Whale doesn’t even deserve to be acknowledged, let alone responded to.

    Carry on kicking ass CV. Oh but please don’t really kick anyone on the ass, I mean that as a metaphor. Google METAPHOR if that helps. M-E-T-A-P-H-O-R. Actually I think you get it, but maybe some people don’t.

  18. millsy 18
    18 August 2012 at 5:00 pm

    Keep it up Standard.

    The right chose the sewers as their battlefield a long time ago. We should make no apologies about taking the fight to them.

    Cameron Slater has a history of vileness, dating back to deriving some form of satisfaction when that woman died after her power was cut off – it was rather like he personlly pulled the plug himself, and got off on it.

    Fighting fire with fire is the most effective form of fighting.

    As for Francesca, she’s a nasty lady — probably has coffee with Monique Watson and runs everyone down.

    • Monique Watson 18.1
      18 August 2012 at 6:12 pm

      Someone’d a say my name? How’s about that. Just when I was summarizing all those nasty death threats from the previous eight months:
      http://nowoccupy.blogspot.com/2012/08/a-one-way-trip-to-gallows-for-these.html
      Personally I believe it is all hate speech which can incite violence. Soft pedaling it doesn’t make the comments less offensive.

      • millsy 18.1.1
        18 August 2012 at 6:15 pm

        you can dish it out just like the rest of it darl. So dont get all precious with me.

        • Monique Watson 18.1.1.1
          19 August 2012 at 11:05 am

          I relish a shit-fight as much as the next commentator. That’s politics innit? Beehives full of people who won’t say what they think.

          • millsy 18.1.1.1.1
            19 August 2012 at 11:22 am

            Good, then you have no right to complain about people being ‘nasty’ anymore.

            BTW MW, I think you’re a poor man’s Cactus Kate 🙂

      • Colonial Viper 18.1.2
        18 August 2012 at 6:20 pm

        Personally I believe it is all hate speech which can incite violence. Soft pedaling it doesn’t make the comments less offensive.

        As if the theft of public assets, and forcing more and more New Zealanders into poverty for the material benefit of the top 1%, isn’t violence visted upon hundreds of thousands.

      • gobsmacked 18.1.3
        18 August 2012 at 6:24 pm

        Yes, it’s nasty stuff, Monique. And I agree, too often the moderators on the Standard look the other way, especially on sexism.

        But when you talk of the “left” or “far left” being guilty, I’d suggest you’re lumping a large majority in with a small minority.

        • r0b 18.1.3.1
          18 August 2012 at 9:25 pm

          Please by all means don’t leave everything up to the moderators. The community should enforce its own standards…

      • mike 18.1.4
        19 August 2012 at 1:35 am

        Monique are you really a chaotic good elf/angel hybrid with high rolls on intelligence and charisma like is says on your website? Or am I taking that too literally? (But so kewl if it’s true.)

  19. fender 19
    18 August 2012 at 5:43 pm

    If CV had made the same comment about the Harawira’s, Slater wouldn’t care one bit.

    Funny how the right wing extremists get upset when the left suggest getting rid of the infiltrators that want to play hijack.

    It’s great to get the chance to celebrate the legend that is CV, shame that turd Slater gets included in the debate, but that was no doubt his other aim; I think he gets even more intoxicated when he gets discussed here.

  20. fender 20
    18 August 2012 at 5:47 pm

    I’ve been away and get welcomed back with moderation! Was it “extremist” or “turd”?

  21. hush minx 21
    18 August 2012 at 9:43 pm

    Five years of TS – how amazing and Congratulations! What a lot of things have changed in that time. 2007 – my mind harks back to Clark and Cullen as the leadership team (and it recently occured to me that Cullen managed to not only be Deputy, but also Fianance and Leader of the House – how come the current incumbents are struggling so much?)

    Anyway, just wanted to say after watching TS for a long time before actually ‘speaking’ my observation is people are pretty respectful if you are constructive. I do find it curious that it’s called sexist – although I guess you’d say there aren’t that many posts in the gender space (any authors about to step forward?). But just like in life – there are good apples, and bad apples – and you can usually tell a mile off which are which. No one is forcing you to read them!

    Finally, for all her lengthly explanations as to why she’s really a balanced type I found it (almost) amusing that Fran used techniques of association to damn David Cunliffe in her post today (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10827742) – and there was I thinking she liked to just say what she really thought, up front and crystal clear…

  22. Polish Pride 22
    18 August 2012 at 10:49 pm

    The funniest thing about both commentators on Whale Oil and the Standard is that both groups delude themselves that their respective political parties have the answers and can make the changes necessary to fix the real problems facing the country. It is even more disappointing from the Standard though as there do see to be some intelligent people on here. Not intelligent enough it would seem however to be able to work out a few key things.
    Moving a coupe of degrees to the left or to the right every few years does not change very much in the big scheme of things and whilst we continue to do this the real problems facing Society and the world will remain no closer to being resolved.
    Neither side of the political spectrum has the answers to key problems.
    Poverty – No answer
    Climate change – ETS = No answer and show not really interested in solving the problem.
    People being made technologically redundant in the system but then having to find another job asap in order to survive- Well you don’t even hear about this as it is just simply lumped in with unemployment. – but again no answer.
    Child abuse – No answer
    You can have a fair system with Zero Tax – its called an RBE and if you or the political parties were really interested in fixing things they would be looking at the steps required to move to such a system.

    We have a political system that is supposed to be a representative democracy. Yet political parties often actively go against the will of the people they are supposed to represent. As an earlier poster put it so succinctly we don’t have democracy, we have an elected dictatorship.
    Less and less people are voting because more and more are feeling disenfranchised with the political system. They simply do not see it working for them anymore.
    If you put the option ‘None of the above’ on ballot papers there’s a good chance it would win by a landslide.

    Both sides are about redistribution of wealth. Taking from one group and giving to their preferred side. That is the cold hard reality of the left vs right paradigm and also why we will be in the same or worse position in 20 or even 50 years time so long as you fail to take a massive step back so that you can see the system for what it really is.
    All of the problems above and more are solvable unfortunately there is just not the political will to do so. Why should there be when the ONLY focus is doing what you need to do to get your party into power at the next election. Thats it. No long term vision. No steps that show how to logically get there.
    It needs to change. It has to change if we are to progress

    When will you wake up to the fact that it is the system that is the problem. Not the other side.

    • blue leopard 22.1
      18 August 2012 at 11:07 pm

      @ PP

      I fairly well agree with your observations, which are well said.

      In response to your conclusion however:

      “When will you wake up to the fact that it is the system that is the problem. Not the other side”

      When I am convinced it is the system at fault and not a corruption of it.

      • Draco T Bastard 22.1.1
        18 August 2012 at 11:56 pm

        The system has been designed by those who corrupt it.

        • blue leopard 22.1.1.1
          19 August 2012 at 12:32 am

          DTB

          The system is a thing that has developed over time, the originators of it are long gone. Therefore it is somewhat incorrect to say the system has been designed by those who corrupt it. However I am certainly prepared to agree that the increasingly dysfunctional system we have now has certainly been corrupted by those who stand to win the most out of corrupting it. And that those people best placed to improve the situation are those that are reaping rewards for not doing so.

          • Draco T Bastard 22.1.1.1.1
            19 August 2012 at 11:57 am

            Therefore it is somewhat incorrect to say the system has been designed by those who corrupt it.

            The system was designed by those who directly benefited from it, i.e, it started off corrupted.

            • Colonial Viper 22.1.1.1.1.1
              19 August 2012 at 12:05 pm

              Again, Seddon (for all his faults) did a lot to right it all, introducing concepts that the Savage Government would later develop more fully.

              When you look back at the history of the (privately owned) New Zealand Company etc, you can’t be surprised there was plenty of corruption and self interest even at the start. Selling parcels of NZ land to working class English folk wanting to start a new life on this side of the world…but not telling them that the land was yet to be “cleared” of Maori tribes was just one example.

              The modus operandi of the East India Company seems to have tainted everything.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                19 August 2012 at 12:47 pm

                The modus operandi of the East India Company is the basis for capitalism. Even today in the free-market era we can see the same mindset in action through all the patent lawsuits that are being fired back and forth between companies – often with the patents being totally bloody stupid and which should never have been issued.

    • Colonial Viper 22.2
      18 August 2012 at 11:09 pm

      when will you wake up to the fact that the “system” and the “people” who operate it are not separable.

      • Polish Pride 22.2.1
        19 August 2012 at 12:29 pm

        Because the system by its very design enables the corruption. There are people within it that are not corrupt. I do agree with you whole heartedly CV but believe that in order to get people to understand it is better to point out how the system has been set up to enable corruption in so many areas. On seeing this people will effectively by default see the corrupt people in action and come to your conclusion on there own which I also see as a very important part of the equation.

        • Colonial Viper 22.2.1.1
          19 August 2012 at 12:39 pm

          Every system is subordinate to the wishes of the people who run it. Unless you wish to change human nature, I’m not sure how you propose to create a system foolproof from people wanting to use it for personal advantage.

          • Draco T Bastard 22.2.1.1.1
            19 August 2012 at 12:44 pm

            True but any system can also be stopped from being used for personal advantage if the entire populace has a say in the running of that system rather than just some elites. The latter is what we have now, the former is what we’re after.

            • Colonial Viper 22.2.1.1.1.1
              19 August 2012 at 12:57 pm

              any system can also be stopped from being used for personal advantage if the entire populace has a say in the running of that system

              I took a brief walk through town from A to B last night, sometime a little after 10.00pm. Having to sidestep puddles of vomit on the footpath enroute. In other words, there is a bit of work to be done to bring the “entire populace” up to speed first.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                19 August 2012 at 1:12 pm

                I didn’t say it would be easy 😛

                • blue leopard …
                  19 August 2012 at 4:29 pm

                  hmm..interesting conversation.

                  I understand PP as saying that a system can be more open to corruption, as compared to a different type of system, which is well worth acknowledging. Agree

                  I understand DTB’s point as a good one; the more people involved in a system the less open it is to corruption. Agree

                  & CV, your point is something I observe a lot and is a reason I don’t condemn representative democracy as a complete washout: from observation, there is a HUGE diversity in people and their interests, and some people are completely disinterested in politics…entirely.

                  …Hence we elect those that are interested in politics to focus on these issues (…I’m not confident they are though 🙁 )

                  Trouble with this subject-matter is that for each change proposed, a series of changes ensue i.e. people may well become more interested in the organization of the system they live in, if they were more involved…

                  There is such a vast room for improvement in what we currently have, I continue to be bewildered at the pitiful choices our politicians provide us with.

    • Colonial Viper 22.3
      18 August 2012 at 11:12 pm

      Neither side of the political spectrum has the answers to key problems.

      And you need to be aware that in NZ the main political spectrum stretches all the way from Right of Centre to Mid Right. Not exactly much to choose from.

      • Polish Pride 22.3.1
        19 August 2012 at 5:14 pm

        CV this post is itself very amusing….

        “in NZ the main political spectrum stretches all the way from Right of Centre to Mid Right.”

        The masses on Whale Oil believe the opposite to be true. They believe that the political system stretches from Mid left to left of Centre. Well at least the intelligent ones on there do. There are those on their that would say that with the exception of Act that the remainder of the political parties span Left of Centre all the way to Communism. Then their is one ‘intelligent’ individual who believes everyone is a communist – but then noone really listtens to him and see him for the idiot he truly is.

    • Draco T Bastard 22.4
      18 August 2012 at 11:54 pm

      Both sides are about redistribution of wealth. Taking from one group and giving to their preferred side.

      And what really needs to happen is that the wealth is returned to the community and that the people then have and equal say in how it is used.

      All of the problems above and more are solvable unfortunately there is just not the political will to do so.

      Most of the politicians still believe in the hierarchical model of society rather than that of a democratic/flat society.

  23. gnomic 23
    19 August 2012 at 1:23 am

    Cameron Slater. Worthless worm, and that’s an insult to worms which at least have a useful role in the biosphere. Son of John Slater, repulsive old school National Party apparatchik in Auckland who must have some sad moments contemplating the deplorable fruit of his loins. Too bad John was unseated as National’s president 414-175 by the utterly dreadful Boagthing back in 2001.

    For insights into the life of the Slaters see Cameron’s hagiography of his dad –

    http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2012/02/whales-budgeting-tips-for-the-poor-ctd-2/

    But why waste even a second thinking about these people, surely a waste of grey matter.

    • Polish Pride 23.1
      19 August 2012 at 5:59 pm

      Actually I see many similarities between Cameron Slaters Whale Oil and The Standard. The main one being that both point out what they see as hypocrisy and failings of the other side. Then Whale Oil has guns and hunting thrown in because, well thats what Cameron Slater is into. He calls things as he sees it. Doesn’t mean he always gets it right. But like it or not Things are better with BOTH Whaleoil and The Standard for the very reasons mentioned above. Otherwise who else attempts to hold our political parties and politicians to some sort of, well anything really!?! …. The media, Us with our vote once every 3 years so that we can be fooled into thinking we still have democracy!?!
      Lastly I suspect many on here will be very happy with his stance on Gay Marriage for which he has taken all sorts of crap from Narrow minded bigots on.
      If nothing else you have a Guy who has suffered from depression, is on a sickness benefit but has decided to actually do something he sees as constructive with his time. Regardless of whether or not you agree with his opinions on politics, he should be applauded for that in my view.

  24. Mark 24
    19 August 2012 at 10:00 am

    The Standard are full of [deleted] who are too chickenshit to post under their own names. [deleted]

    [Sorry anonymous commenter Mark, your attack on anonymous commenters needed trimming a bit. r0b]

  25. Tiger Mountain 25
    19 August 2012 at 11:48 am

    Not many if any marks for you then “Mark”. Handles are fine with me if used consistently so a profile builds over time and people get to know where the commenter is coming from.

  26. Balanced View 26
    19 August 2012 at 2:08 pm

    Nice post Viper.
    But there is no difference between this site and WO’s as far as biased views, personal attacks, and half truths.

    • prism 26.1
      19 August 2012 at 2:17 pm

      Balanced View
      And of course you have a balanced view that would be the pride of any commenter. Your chosen pseudonym however indicates a bias.

      • Balanced View 26.1.1
        19 August 2012 at 2:21 pm

        Perhaps you could inform me of what the perceived bias is, and how my pseudonym relates to it?

        • ropata 26.1.1.1
          19 August 2012 at 11:51 pm

          TS writers generally use history, evidence, and human empathy to make their case.
          WO relies on greed and resentment…

    • Colonial Viper 26.2
      19 August 2012 at 2:55 pm

      Cheers BV.

  27. prism 27
    19 August 2012 at 4:02 pm

    There is reference to wankers, turds, dumbarses and pricks etc etc by some people here. This is a place for intelligent thoughts if possible and the shit should be short. And we should be aiming it at the opinion not the person. I know that I find editing an essential. Other people can be so annoying when you know you’re right! And TS can’t be blamed for every tasteless comment.

  28. captain hook 28
    20 August 2012 at 11:14 am

    +1 P
    thats the way they do it.
    start piling on the crap so that everything descends intyo a vile mess and any discussion is negated.
    thats whaleoils style.
    just shit on everything.